BTM16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 1468

BTM16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 1468

Leave to raise the two new grounds of appeal was refused because the appellant gave no acceptable explanation for not raising them before the primary judge and the proposed grounds lacked merit. The Tribunal's reasons did not reveal any misapprehension of s 91R of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), its adverse credibility findings and rejection of the appellant's claimed fear of harm in Pakistan were open on the evidence and materials before it, and its reasons provided an evident and intelligible justification. Accordingly, no jurisdictional error or appellable error was shown.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Judicial Review Decision / Appeal to the Federal Court of Australia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection (class Xa) Visa' 'judicial Review' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal' 'jurisdictional Error' 'leave to Raise New Grounds on Appeal' 'section 91 R of the Migration Act 1958 (cth)' 'credibility Findings' 'complementary Protection']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['protection (class Xa) Visa' 'judicial Review' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal' 'jurisdictional Error' 'leave to Raise New Grounds on Appeal' 'section 91 R of the Migration Act 1958 (cth)' 'credibility Findings' 'complementary Protection']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Migration Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Judicial Review Decision / Appeal to the Federal Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellant should be granted leave to raise two grounds of appeal not raised before the primary judge.' 'Whether the Tribunal acted in a manifestly unreasonable way or ignored persecution and harm under s 91R of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).' "Whether the primary judge erred by dismissing the judicial review application without considering alleged legal and factual errors in the Tribunal's decision." "Whether the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings and rejection of the appellant's claims to fear harm in Pakistan disclosed jurisdictional error."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to raise the two new grounds of appeal was refused because the appellant gave no acceptable explanation for not raising them before the primary judge and the proposed grounds lacked merit. The Tribunal's reasons did not reveal any misapprehension of s 91R of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), its adverse credibility findings and rejection of the appellant's claimed fear of harm in Pakistan were open on the evidence and materials before it, and its reasons provided an evident and intelligible justification. Accordingly, no jurisdictional error or appellable error was shown.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The notice of appeal filed on 18 December 2018 is dismissed.' "The appellant is to pay the first respondent's costs to be taxed failing agreement."]